Welcome to PlagueFest.com! Log in or Sign up to interact with the Plague Fest community.
  1. Welcome Guest! to interact with the community and gain access to all the site's features.

America against Syria, possibility of Third World War

Discussion in In The News started by JorisCeoen, Aug 24, 2013

  1. Apr 9, 2012
    Posts
    Ok guys, I guess the thread had to be made somewhat.

    Just about everything I hear in the news about America, China, Russia Syria ofc etc it really feels like it's heatening up more and more, to hear that today apparantly America is thinking of interventing in Syria.

    Now I've heard already many theories from many different people and one theory is entirely different than others. I'm not too experienced in this stuff, but I'm not ashamed to say I'm a bit afraid if there is really could be a possibility to a third world war.

    Just gonna link one article but there are hundreds probably: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10263765/US-positioning-forces-for-possible-action-against-Syria.html

    I would like to hear all different kinds of standpoints, and perhaps some clarification on what all of this is, because I really can only understand somewhat that is appearing in the media, and even then it's just media so it may not always be true, but I for damn sure am getting more and more people telling me a Third World War might be happening (some say it actually already is happening with all the rebellions over the world).
    I want to listen to many other people to give myself a better idea of what we're dealing with and what all this situation is about.

    Why would humanity have the need or feeling to even start a war, what's the deal putting yourself in that situation to pull the trigger and make it all more difficult for everyone and yourself and perhaps end humanity for the sake of nothing by then...

    Could the thread be kept clean of trolls and answer only to the subject please, thanks!
  2. Dec 6, 2011
    Posts
    A shit ton of soldiers are also being deployed to South Korea....

    Our government has its head up its ass.
  3. Nov 6, 2011
    Posts
    Read half of this and got over it
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Aug 1, 2011
      Posts
      From what I have heard, we aren't being deployed to Syria at all yet. Maybe special organizations have, but not us soldiers. Really we are still going to the Middle East and Korea. Those are the two main places.
      • Informative Informative x 1
      • Aug 12, 2012
        Posts
        US going to war against the Middle East or something...
      • Jun 23, 2010
        Posts
        US is going to War with everyone who doesn't agree with us. We (USA) need to stop playing World Police IMO.
        • Agree Agree x 4
        • May 12, 2007
          Posts
          I agree, if we voted on wars we would have none on the US side, our idiot government thinks we need to fight everything except the issues our country is having. Lack of jobs, government spending, national debt, homeless population rising, housing market, we have so much more we can be doing with that money right now other than start another war to show who has the bigger stick.
        • Aug 12, 2012
          Posts
          there be no peace in this world
        • Apr 9, 2012
          Posts
          Sometimes I believe some people are too bored to live without war, I think there really are some people who would just love war because they like it :frown:
        • Feb 21, 2007
          Posts
          I'm not sure there will ever be a Third world war, unless a first-world country gets invaded
          • Agree Agree x 1
          • Mar 4, 2012
            Posts
            You're okay with sitting back and watching genocide occur when we have the power to stop it?

            All of the above IS the government's fault. Giving them more money to spend on their programs and not the military isn't going to help anything.

            War is expensive. No one just starts one (on the scale we're discussing) just as a show of force.

            War is just an extension of the politics. It's what they call a "hard power" as opposed to something called a "soft power" such as diplomacy. The hard powers bring more weight into a conversation.

            There will not be a WW3 any time soon. Syria will definitely not be the cause of it, it's just not important enough. China doesn't have the naval capabilities to really deploy a large enough force to seriously challenge the US anywhere outside of their region. Putin isn't insane either. He won't pull Russia into a major war just to protect one of his few allies left in the Middle East. Sending weapons is one thing but getting into a major war with a developed nation is a completely different matter for them.

            The US parks warships off the coast of countries literally all the time. When you have 100,000 tons of diplomacy and enough firepower to destroy small nations parked off your front porch you tend to start listening.
            • Agree Agree x 2
            • Apr 4, 2009
              Posts
              Russia wouldn't do jack shit if we fucked Syria up.
              • Like Like x 3
              • Jun 11, 2012
                Posts
                Main issue that is being heating up was the use of Chemical Warfare that was used in Syria that led to high number of death. At that point the intervention of a country can be justified but to a degree.
              • Feb 19, 2011
                Posts
                I know some people want to act and intervene with Syria, but those people who are saying that are not the ones who will be going over there risking their lives. I know it is the military's job to protect and serve, but going over there is not worth it when soldiers could die. The United States and our allies/friends have lost enough troops already.
                • Agree Agree x 1
                • Mar 4, 2012
                  Posts
                  That's the same attitude that prevented the US from stopping the genocide in Rwanda and pulled us out of Somalia, letting hundreds of thousands of people die.
                  • Winner Winner x 1
                  • Nov 11, 2011
                    Posts
                    We're at war with so many nations... the difference is that we're spread out too vast for our own good. We need to shrink back and take care of our own people first. Other surrounding countries will eventually take action, we can't save everyone.
                  • Jul 20, 2010
                    Posts
                    Honestly I would say let Syria deal with their own civil war. But we can't really let that happen. Syria is a proxy for Iran/Russia, now as we saw in Egypt a person can come to power that wants to erode peoples rights in that country, which then led to the Egyptian military stepping in and removing the President from Power.

                    If we do sit by and let Syria handle it's own mess one of three things can happen.

                    1. The current regime in power will kill many people in the civil war, seeing as how it's a civil war these kind of things happen in one. If that does happen the status quo stays the same in the ME.
                    2. The rebels win by their own will or help from Western Nations and you can see a leader come to power that answers to no one but their own people or group. Meaning Iran/Russia won't have a Proxy anymore and can change the status quo for good or bad. Seeing as how things went down in Egypt it will probably change for the worse.
                    3. Terrorist groups continue to flow into Syria with hopes of gaining power by removing the current regime and have a new country to call home and use as a training ground in the ME. Which they can then in turn use to launch attacks into Israel and other out lying countries they don't like or hate the people for really stupid reasons -_-.

                    Syria probably won't be the flash point for WWIII, but WWIII can and probably will start somewhere in the ME. Currently there is Syria, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen on fire and dealing with issues. Sure it's 2nd and 3rd world countries but if the fire's spread to other developed countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia or Israel then you might have a situation on your hands.

                    The US when it want's to flex it's muscle without firing a shot, we tend to park Naval Ships outside countries waters. This sends a very strong message to countries since usually we park enough ships that can easily wipe out any counties armed forces within hours. We do this when China saber rattles at Taiwan we park a few ships at port in Taiwan and China simmers down, because if China does attack and they get one single scratch on a US naval ship from incoming fire it's an act of war and then we can bring the pain on China with it's very weak and lack luster military.


                    To the people that say the USA needs to stop being the police of the world and also to the people that say the USA shouldn't do anything you both fail to understand that this isn't just about one country. This is all about an entire region and what can happen to the relations we have with allies and enemies in different regions. We care about the ME a lot because a lot of oil passes through there and that will directly affect world crude prices, Israel is one of our Allies and we stand by our Allies.

                    The USA get's hate when it steps in to stop wrongs, but when we do nothing and watch we also get hate from the world. People can't have it both ways either you want us to help or not pick one and shut up pretty much.
                    Were not really that spread out as a fighting force to be honest. We have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting currently. The rest are in bases in the states or overseas in areas that we man to make sure nothing happens like the DMZ in the Korea's. We only need foots on the ground really in mass if we want to invade a country and remove a leader. If we need to simply stem the tide of death against groups of people air and naval power is more than enough with some special operations boots on the ground.
                    • Informative Informative x 2
                    • Mar 4, 2012
                      Posts
                      We're really not though. It's hard to get a deployment right now if you actually want to fight.

                      Right now the military is down sizing and recruitment has slowed substantially, the combat mission in Afghanistan is almost over as well.

                      And one thing that history has shown is that someone else will NOT take action. Hell we had to stop the genocide in Yugoslavia in Europe's own backyard with plenty of developed nations able to step in yet no one else did anything until we came in AND to add on to that it almost happened AGAIN in Kosovo but we learned our lesson and stopped it before it even started.
                      Post Merged, Aug 24, 2013
                      This.
                      • Agree Agree x 1
                      • Jul 20, 2010
                        Posts
                        That is very true they didn't want to or lacked the power to which makes me laugh as you have England and France there with sizable armies. But again they needed the good ole US of A to come and stop it.

                        Also this is what we mean by parking ships outside countries. It usually consists of an entire battle group.

                        [IMG]

                        What's not pictured there is also submarines that are attached to each battle group. You have that much firepower parked on your door stop you will think twice before trying anything. Battle groups can also include more than one carrier as well and they can merge two battle groups into one big battle group which effectively doubles the firepower and defensive capabilities of it.

                        We have also have 6 Fleets that are tasked to different areas of the world and provide a show of force when needed and used to protect shipping lanes and give aid to countries when needed.
                      • Feb 19, 2011
                        Posts
                        I am personal friends with a Rwandan Genocide survivor. She lives happily here in the United States. I have also met the last American man who stayed and protected an orphanage full of children named Carl Wilkens. They both understood why Bill Clinton did not intervene, did I agree with his decision, no. Do they agree, no, but they both understand why certain decisions were made. We did intervene in Somalia, but when U.S troops were dragged naked in the streets, Bill Clinton did not want another disaster in Rwanda like what happened in Somalia. That is why the U.S. pulled out. We are not the only ones to be blamed with Rwanda. France had a strong presence over there, they could have stopped it. Every country in the world could be blamed for not doing anything in Rwanda, not just the U.S. The U.S. doesn't have to be the world police, other countries can decide to take action.